Young adults from broken homes in which a parent had had a same-sex relationship reported modestly more psychological and social problems in their current lives than peers from other families that had experienced divorce and other disruptions, a new study has found, stirring bitter debate among partisans on gay marriage.

The study counted parents as gay or lesbian by asking participants whether their parents had ever had a same-sex relationship; the parents may not have identified themselves as gay or lesbian. Gay-rights groups attacked the study, financed by conservative foundations, as biased and poorly done even before its publication on Sunday in the journal Social Science Research.

But outside experts, by and large, said the research was rigorous, providing some of the best data yet comparing outcomes for adult children with a gay parent with those with heterosexual parents. But they also said the findings were not particularly relevant to the current debate over gay marriage or gay parenting.

About half the study participants with a gay parent, as defined in the study, were born out of wedlock and half into a traditional family that broke up. Many lived with the gay parent sporadically.

For instance, 38 percent of those who had a lesbian mother said they were currently on public assistance, compared with 31 percent of those whose parents divorced late and 10 percent of those who grew up in a traditional family.

The article does mention a study is need on “stable” gay parents compared to stable heterosexual parents. This is an interesting one personally for me. My wife has a gay friend and he and his partner adopted a Girl and Boy (siblings) that were going from foster home to foster home. On the surface, seems like a good idea to have a stable place to live; however, the men were adjusting to raising a girl. He would ask my wife for advise raising a girl... Anyhow, I wonder in the long run if it will turn out better for the children...

I love the use of the word "modestly" when talking about the differnce in childrens' outcomes gay vs. traditional family.

"One deficit is particularly worrying: Less than 2 percent of children from intact, biological families reported experiencing sexual abuse of some nature, but that figure for children of same-sex couples is 23 percent"

And there are so many variables in a study like this. Could the reason more children of lesbians end up on public assistance be because Mom is a liberal and they grow up thinking they should be able to do anything that makes them happy and let the government support them? Maybe they should do a study on far left liberal parents and the outcome for their children.

One question I want studied is, "How many lesbians adopt girls and how many men adopt boys?" I've found on my own that it is VERY slanted toward same sex adoption. Years from now we will wake up to little girls claiming "mommy" messed with me all my life, or daddy molested me from my time in diapers. If you ask me, many of them are raising future sex partners for themselves.

You have to ask yourself, "How many homosexual men adopt a girl and why not?"

Now, the important thing to remember about those statistics, is that gays are maybe 2-3% of the population. So, they may cause 10% more problems, but there are 20-30 times fewer of them causing problems for their kids than all the irresponsible heteros divorcing out there. Actually probably even fewer, since people get multiple divorces and repeat the damage.

So, why does hardly anyone on the right have any interest in reforming divorce laws? Am I cynical for thinking it must be selfishness or cowardice?

It seems astonishing to me that anyone would need a study to know that divorce and same-sex relationships are damaging to children and that a normal and unified family is superior. Everyone was a child once, so everyone would know that they needed the stability and support of a good father and a good mother for the best child rearing experience (just as, it would go without saying, that all "gay" individuals had to have normal, heterosexual parents to exist).

I guess these studies are needed to try to prove that "gay" couple can raise children normally but since these studies always point to the damage that is done, they are discounted or attacked by the homosexuals as biased and/or flawed.

I have known more than my share of "gays" in my life - and none of them should be anywhere near children, much less responsible for providing a stable and supportive basis for their development.

My husband’s first wife left him for another woman. They are both teachers (surprise), and even team teach in the same class. Their dream was to replace the children’s father with this other woman. They are extremely liberal, pro-abortion, anti-man, controlling, OCD weirdos. We spent many hours and thousands of dollars fighting for the two children. The children now live with us full-time, and do not see their mother at all.

As your post indicates, the gay lifestyle is not one I would wish on any child. We never vetted President Obama, and the results are frightening. We never vetted the gay lifestyle, but we are told that we are bigots if we are not open and accepting. It is clear that President Obama is a disaster. I also feel that it will become clear that the open acceptance of the homosexual lifestyle is also a total disaster. One part is the adopting of children; and twenty to thirty years down the road, we are not going to like the results.

For a relationship between 2-consenting adults in private, they certainly force acceptance of their abnormal lifestyle on an unsuspecting unconsenting adopted child.

The “2-consenting adults in private” meme also falls flat when we learn this administration and some states are pushing for teaching standards that require highlighting the gay lifestyle in various coursework lessons going back to 1st grade or even kindergarten. If that is not enough proof, why do they seek to have gay-teens organizations in schools? Consenting ADULTS was a lie.

13
posted on 06/12/2012 10:04:50 AM PDT
by a fool in paradise
(The media ignored the 40th anniversary of Bill Ayers' Pentagon bombing but not Watergate. Ask Why.)

You need a married mother and a father for optimal results. Why is that so strange? Both boys and girl learn how to be men or women and how they should treat and be treated by the opposite sex from their parents.

Anything else is like trying to sit on a three legged stool that only has two legs. It can be done but it is a lot of work and concentration.

It is amazing how they are willing to run ads saying that home ownership will improve your child's life but are unwilling to even consider that having male/female married pair to raise said child will improve it far more.

You are exactly right. It is a social experiment in which the children bear all costs. They are being used to add “legitimacy” to an abnormal “family”. Once my stepchildren were exposed to a normal, loving family and younger siblings, they made the choice themselves.

But outside experts, by and large, said the research was rigorous, providing some of the best data yet comparing outcomes for adult children with a gay parent with those with heterosexual parents. But they also said the findings were not particularly relevant to the current debate over gay marriage or gay parenting.

does not compute.kinda like the solar activity does not factor into the glo-bull warmonger's claims.

17
posted on 06/12/2012 11:22:19 AM PDT
by TurboZamboni
(Looting the future to bribe the present)

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.